Back to the Charter
I WILL not shock you by proclaiming the slogan "Back to the charter;" rather, the average Zionist will put me down as a stand-patter: or a parrot who learnt one lesson and could not forget it, or earn a new one. Forgive me then for injecting this personal parenthesis. In the past twenty years I have held every conceivable opinion on every subject on which men generally differ because I have never admitted that any kind of last word has been said on anything.
I will not, therefore, say that “Back to the Charter” is the last word, but I conceive it to be the best warranted one in this stage of Zionism. Since January, 1903, I have been the most quiet of political Zionists because I did not believe that the movement could be aided by sounding the big drum of sentiment, nor did I desire to expend my modest mental activity in the round of schemes and plans that each congress and conference produced. I saw but two occasions when political Zionism could be put into practise—after the Constitutional massacres and the beginning of the Turkish Rebellion. As far as suggestion could go, I submitted my views to the leaders, but the leadership was fighting for existence and the political Zionism was being cuffed and buffeted on every side. Worse still, political Zionism has had its funeral read over it and he who talks of a real Jewish nationalism, does best to alloy the idea with something else.
Now that the leadership, to put it discreetly, is in the hands of non-political Zionists, it seems even more foolhardy to propose a return to an attitude that even Dr. Max Nordau felt had passed away when the young Turks began their regime.
I set it down, however, without the enthusiasm of a convert and believer that in less than a year the cry "Back to the Charter" will be the rallying call in Zionism. I do not say this because I am an admirer of this particular means of achieving Zionism. And the means after all, is all that it is. I state it because I believe
recent happenings outside of the movement will force us back to first principles.
Let us recall that the idea of the charter was suggested by experience. There was no security of tenure and no real protection of life in Palestine and these things do not exist to-day. An investigation into the form of most of the Jewish holdings in the country would explain some things that I do not care to discuss. There is no possibility of such a political development which would maintain that identity of the Jews which in a sense is the whole purpose of Zionism.
Therefore there was written into the Basle program the now stumbling phrases “publicity assured legally secured 1100107 -- that is the title of settlement which should he clear to the holders and the words should stand witnesses to the contract. This involved us into efforts of diplomacy and because we are, aS a group, poor politicians it seemed better to he practical than to endeavor to learn how to do it. Enough.
What then prompts the suggestion that the unwilling pupil renews the course of instruction? This: The Italian-Turkish— it is not a real war yet—makes evident that Turkey, which could not protect itself on its European frontier, cannot protect its African sea coast possessions and this implies with facts, figures and map that Turkey cannot protect Palestine. If now you will study the southern coast line of the Mediterranean, you will note that the European powers have not yet acquired Morocco, Cyrenaica and Palestine, the last two of which are under Turkish influence. Recent events have shown that Morocco is too near Spain and France for its acquisition by Germany. Cyrenaica is almost worthless and is wedged in between the Italian Tripoli and the British Egypt for the comfort of a power that does not wish to spend millions on guarding three wild or desert frontiers. There remains then for the desirous Palestine, approachable, if necessary, without passing through the jealously guarded entrances of Gibraltar and